Serhii Bykov, Political Consultant

 

The UN Charter begins with the words, "We the peoples of the United Nations determined to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war…" But is the UN resolute enough to respond to modern security threats? The Russian-Ukrainian war has finally proven that the post-World War II architecture of international security has become exhausted. A country that holds a permanent seat on the UN Security Council and has corresponding privileges has waged a genocidal war, involving decapitation, the execution of civilians, and the deportation of children. Moreover, there are no mechanisms in the UN to strip a Permanent Member of the Security Council of its privileges. This means that the aggressor can block all attempts to stop it. What worked in the past no longer works.

Criticism of the UN's ability to adequately respond to modern threats is voiced even by former top officials of the organization. Leaving the post of UN High Commissioner for Human Rights in 2018, Zeid Raad Al Hussein predicted a collapse of the UN if the Security Council was not reformed. He criticized the injustice of having 5 out of 15 Security Council members who can unilaterally reject joint decisions: " When they cooperate things can move; when they don’t everything becomes stuck and the organisation, in general, becomes so marginal to the resolution of these sorts of horrific conflicts that we see". This is exactly what we are witnessing today.

A key mechanism for ensuring security is defense alliances, with NATO being one of the most important. Henry Kissinger, former US Secretary of State under Nixon and Ford, wrote in his book "World Order" that NATO is a key organization that guarantees security for its members and predicts that the Alliance will strengthen as a result of expansion policies. Kissinger has often been criticized for his negative attitude towards Ukraine's Euro-Atlantic integration. He expressed this view until the end of 2022, but given the reality of the Russian-Ukrainian war, Kissinger recognized that Ukraine should become a NATO member-state. However, it is not necessary to reduce the entire North Atlantic Alliance to the opinion of one American political scientist, even if he was very influential in the past.

John Kriendler, a professor at the George Marshall European Center for Security Studies, highlighted the benefits that NATO and Ukraine would gain from integration as early as 2007. He emphasizes the increase in geopolitical influence for both NATO and Ukraine, the strengthening and cost reduction of defense capabilities, and the acceleration of reforms and European integration for Ukraine. However, the key advantage, of course, according to John Kriendler, is collective security: "Collective defense remains a core function of NATO and a core benefit of NATO membership despite the fact that an attack on an ally is regarded as highly unlikely under present and foreseeable circumstances (this is a report from 2007). Nevertheless, in that unlikely eventuality, all allies would be obligated by the Washington Treaty to respond".

The Washington Treaty declares in Article 5 the principle of the Alliance's collective response in case of aggression against one of its member states. This is the article referred to when people say that an attack on one is an attack on all. As long as an attack has not occurred, there is Article 4, which guarantees the conduct of joint consultations at the request of member states in case of external threats. Throughout NATO's history, Article 4 has been applied 7 times (mostly at the request of Turkey), while Article 5 has been invoked only once in response to the attack of the international terrorist organization Al-Qaeda on the United States. However, these security guarantees apply only to actual NATO members, among which Ukraine and 34 other NATO partners are not yet included.

Given the collapse of the existing global security system, we must propose a model that will provide effective security guarantees to Ukraine today and will be the foundation of collective security for other NATO partners in the future. Of course, these guarantees should be maintained until the state gains full membership in the Alliance. In fact, such a model has already been developed by the international Yermak-Rasmussen group under the general name of the Kyiv Security Compact (KSC). It was presented by President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskіy at the Group of Twenty (G20) summit in Indonesia, where he called for a summit to sign this document. More precisely, a series of documents, but more on that later.

The key goal of the KSC is to provide real security guarantees to Ukraine, but its provisions can also be applied to guarantee the security of other states outside the North Atlantic Alliance that may become victims of external aggression. It is in this context that I propose discussing the KSC.

The KSC will have a two-dimensional structure. The first dimension is a multilateral agreement on strategic partnership. The guarantors will undertake mandatory obligations through a joint document on strategic partnership, which will be binding on them by the agreement between them. The second dimension is bilateral agreements at the level of governments and parliaments between Ukraine and the security guarantors. The guarantors must assume long-term and bilateral legal and political obligations.

Consultations and Actions. KSC regulates the convening of consultations within 24 hours and the adoption of a decision on the activation of extended guarantees within 72 hours, consisting of a coalition of countries willing to join in the defense of the victim of aggression. Only a request is necessary for the relevant consultations, and there is no need to confirm external aggression by third parties, such as the blocked UN Security Council.

Weapons. The victim of aggression should receive the necessary material and military support. In addition to the main guarantees, other countries may join on additional or specific issues related to security guarantees. The contact group on defense issues in Ukraine (better known as "Ramstein") could form the basis for this wider group and form a support coalition.

Sanctions. KSC provides for the application of a package of sanctions against the aggressor state, no less than that imposed on the Russian Federation as of September 1, 2022. This includes trade restrictions, business operations, asset freezes, disconnection from the banking network, and so on.

The vision of KSC allows for the formation of a collective security architecture based outside of NATO. Its provisions allow for avoiding flaws that exist in the mechanisms of the United Nations.

Of course, one day we will become full members of NATO. Ukraine, with its heroism and victory, has shown the world how to fight for our freedom and yours. We have a unique opportunity not only to preserve ourselves but also to be at the forefront of shaping a new post-war world with new standards and guarantees that will meet modern threats.